Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754995AbYCHHau (ORCPT ); Sat, 8 Mar 2008 02:30:50 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751023AbYCHHam (ORCPT ); Sat, 8 Mar 2008 02:30:42 -0500 Received: from 1wt.eu ([62.212.114.60]:2316 "EHLO 1wt.eu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750823AbYCHHal (ORCPT ); Sat, 8 Mar 2008 02:30:41 -0500 Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2008 08:30:01 +0100 From: Willy Tarreau To: Andi Kleen Cc: Chris Snook , Andrew Buehler , Frederik Deweerdt , belcampo , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Hyperthreading performance oddities Message-ID: <20080308073000.GH8953@1wt.eu> References: <47BE9781.3030304@zonnet.nl> <20080222100630.GE5906@slug> <47D14526.2070103@gmail.com> <47D192BF.5090501@redhat.com> <87zltae3y7.fsf@basil.nowhere.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87zltae3y7.fsf@basil.nowhere.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1839 Lines: 45 Hi Andi, On Fri, Mar 07, 2008 at 08:20:32PM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote: > Chris Snook writes: > > > > Turning on hyperthreading effectively halves the amount of cache > > available for each logical CPU when both are doing work, which can do > > more harm than good. > > When the two cores are in the same address space (as in being two > threads of the same process) L1 cache will be shared on P4. I think > for the other cases the cache management is also a little more > sophisticated than a simple split, depending on which HT generation > you're talking about (Intel had at least 4 generations out, each with > improvements over the earlier ones) Oh that's quite interesting to know. > BTW your argument would be in theory true also for multi core with > shared L2 or L3, but even there the CPUs tend to be more sophisticated. > e.g. Core2 has a mechanism called "adaptive cache" which allows one > Core to use significantly more of the L2 in some cases. > > > Number-crunching applications that utilize the > > cache effectively generally don't benefit from hyperthreading, > > particularly floating-point-intensive ones. > > That sounds like a far too broad over generalization to me. > > -Andi (who personally always liked HT) Well, in my experience, except for compiling, HT has always caused massive slowdowns, especially on network-intensive applications. Basically, network perf took a 20-30% hit, while compiling took 20-30% boost. But I must admit that I never tried HT on anything more recent than a P4, maybe things have changed since. regards, willy -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/